The road to a unified men’s tour is close but it’s not without potholes

Each week, we ask our panel of writers, PGA members and golf industry experts to weigh in with their views on the hot topics of the day.

Last Sunday, Tiger Woods made an appearance at the Genesis Invitational in the booth with Jim Nance and Trevor Immelman. When asked about talks with Trump and a potential resolution to the PGA Tour – PIF stalemate, Woods indicated he felt a deal was close and we could see LIV players on the PGA Tour even this year. Meanwhile, LIV Golf just extended their agreement to play in Adelaide, Australia through 2031. Those two things seem contradictory but perhaps the solution is for the PGA Tour to play from January to August with a LIV-type tour in the Fall that plays all over the world. It would all be run by Jay Monahan and the PIF would have a seat at the table through their investment. Is that realistic?

Jim Deeks, Fairways Magazine (@jimdeeks): Good question.  Even though I despise LIV, I do keep in mind that one of the purposes of the LIV development was to be more of an international tour, with players from and tournaments in different countries… which was the thrust behind Greg Norman’s concept of a World Tour thirty years ago.  But, indeed, is it realistic?  American players generally don’t like to travel, so will Adelaide and other “foreign” venues attract all the big names?  And will American viewers bother to watch tournaments from other countries, beyond the (British) Open and Ryder Cup? Personally, I would find a robust and truly international World Tour well worth watching and supporting, and it could soften my disdain for the greedy bunch who bolted the PGA Tour in the last three years.

Craig Loughry, Golf Ontario (@craigloughry): I think Jay and company are trying their best to get this resolved to make a splash for the Players, to put extra special attention to their event. That may be ambitious, but news on that front has been eerily quiet (not much big rock news…just yeah we’re talking, we’re making progress, etc), you just know they’re closer than they’re disclosing.  I think both can co-exist going forward, it’s very possible with their won events or “seasons” happening in opposite weeks or months. And Adelaide could easily become a Signature event as it rivals the Waste Management, so that recent announcement still fits within the overall “merge” of players/Tours. Get your popcorn people!

Michael Schurman, Master Professional / Hall of Fame Member, PGA of Canada: Have you ever noticed that when one kid in school is good at something like a sport, they are good at everything? No doubt Tiger is one of the top players of all time, and he is very articulate. He has a great gift for talking and never telling you anything. His voice is gravitating, his intelligence attractive, his personality magnetic and, of course, he has a smile that exudes affection, but he never commits to anything publicly. He never tells the real deal, and he never lies while doing it. He is the Pied Piper. He can get people to do things they would never do just because he can play golf and splash that smile. Why is he going to Trump for advice, perhaps to improve his manipulation methods? Monahan must be something to behold in a Board Room. There hasn’t been a con artist like him since Houdini or Titanic Thompson. So, what is the truth? Follow the money.

TJ Rule, Golf Away Tours (@GolfAwayTJ): Not sure what realistic means in this day and age.  I guess anything is possible and it would be good for golf to make it a world tour.  Problem is, how many of the top players in the world are going to want to travel all over the world to play big events each year? Lots of challenges there and it would again hurt non-Signature Tour events, but that’s way down the road right now.  We’ve heard for years now that they are “close”, why would this time be any different?

Hal Quinn, Freelance Writer, Vancouver: It’s a brilliant idea! Let LIV play during the NFL season, wish them luck trying to get eyeballs and sponsors, and after one more kick at the watering hole Down Under, kiss it goodbye. Letting the LIVers back on Tour without penalties or sanctions is the only flaw. For any knee bend and tug at the forelock, what is the Tour getting — three or four players who might (might) move the all-important TV ratings needle on a Sunday? That’s it! Lot of bullying going on internationally lately. This is just another example.

Peter Mumford, Fairways Magazine (@FairwaysMag): Nobody associated with the PGA Tour will ever admit this, nor will their wealthy SSG backers, but a world tour won’t work. American players and American fans and American sponsors like everything close by. They could care less about growing the game in Singapore or Saudi Arabia. The DP World Tour is already going to those far-flung places and could easily accommodate or absorb the LIV Golf guys. Absent LIV’s silly shotgun starts and ridiculous team play, the two tours could come together for majors and six to ten other events that feature best on best. A monopoly based in Ponte Vedra works for the U.S. but not for the whole world.

In a separate press conference during the Genesis, PGA Tour Commissioner Jay Monahan talked about the best thing for golf being reunification – whatever that entails. If Monahan is correct and the new world order sees the best against the best more often, that sounds like more ‘must watch’ events on the calendar. How many tournaments are you likely to watch in a season and is it more than you traditionally watched?

Deeks: I really only pay attention to the majors, the Ryder Cup, and the Olympics, although if I’m home on a Sunday afternoon, I’ll watch whatever golf is on TV, but in the background as I’m surfing the internet trying to find reasonable solutions to my abysmal short game.  But if the Golf World Order will be changing, I might pay more attention to more best vs. best events.

Loughry: That sounds great, best on best…it happens 4 times per year and I will continue to park my time to watch those Majors (and Ryder Cup), and I’d do it 4 to 6 more times if provided the following: (especially) if at a good venue; and on the left (west) coast in the Spring or Fall so it can be watched at night. That would be utopia, I’d tune in and sign up for that.

Schurman: Maybe this is what the PGA TOUR wants Trump to help them with. How to light a fire so he can put it out and save everyone.

Rule: The Majors are the only tournaments that grab my attention these days.  If they can get a great field at an iconic course like Royal Melbourne, perhaps I’ll tune in to watch some, but my other golf watching is simply by accident when I happen to be home with nothing to do on a Sunday afternoon, which thankfully isn’t a common occurrence.

Quinn: Not quite like the olden days, but now it’s just the Majors, The Players’ (it needs the apostrophe), bits of the Canadian, and one or two others are weather dependent (local weather that is). The Tour has lost its glow and has nothing to do with the carpet baggers that left for LIV. Look at last week — Aberg, Maverick McNealey, Denny McCarthy, Davis Thompson, plus a few of the olde guard — who needs the handful of big names from LIV? Who needs to see Rahm, DeChambeau, or the mulleted-Aussie when the young guys are out there playing just as exciting, often more exciting, golf?  Linking up with LIV has to have some advantage to the Tour. With the young talent now on full display, hard to see anything on the plus side. Getting fans (sadly, the critical component is U.S. TV viewers) back is another question.

Mumford: I watch the majors and a handful of others based on the course and the tournament history. Riviera, Pebble Beach, TPC Scottsdale, TPC Sawgrass, Bay Hill, Muirfield Village, the RBC Canadian Open and wherever the Scottish Open is played. I don’t see that changing because the PGA Tour is throwing a lot of money at a tournament, limiting the field and calling it best-on-best. When it’s just about money, it’s not compelling.

We’re six weeks into the TGL schedule and that includes a three-match marathon this past Monday. Are you hooked or is it just not your thing? 

Deeks: Not my thing.  Too loud, too over-caffeinated, too irrelevant.  Fixing my short game is a bigger priority.

Loughry: I missed this week’s version, unfortunately, but I did see some highlights that actually looked like fun, particularly between McIlroy and Aberg.

Schurman: I’ve liked it since the beginning. It’s quirky, and the players have to lighten up more, but we have a 3 1/2-foot-high cedar rail fence around our front property that is completely buried. Our back deck off the kitchen has a drift that is close to 7 feet deep. I don’t like goofy golf, but I do enjoy watching the players perform, and the course opens in 60 days.

Rule: Definitely not hooked on it, but I’ve seen a few matches.  Can’t say the product excites me, but if it’s on while I’m home, I’ll give it a watch.  They are trying hard to make it more interesting with interviews between shots, changes to the “hammer” rule, etc., but they haven’t got me hooked yet.

Quinn: Overheard a talking head on The Golf Channel state emphatically that TGL’s rule change on the hammer was essential. Hmmm, didn’t know there was a hammer rule to change. Didn’t notice last week’s hiatus or the triple on Not My President Day. So, all things considered, guess it’s not my thing.

Mumford: I’m hooked to a point, so what’s that? Half hooked? I’ve seen the start of all the episodes but sometimes have drifted away when the score gets too lopsided. There’s a lot to like about the TGL product – it’s fun, the players are way more animated than in a real tournament and the competition sometimes has been close – but the noise and the over-exuberant announcers remind me of wrestling and the endless chatter can be mind-numbing. Ok, maybe quarter-hooked.